Externment order : essential or excessive? | KIIT School of Law | CCLSR скачать в хорошем качестве

Externment order : essential or excessive? | KIIT School of Law | CCLSR

𝐑𝐚𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐭 𝐊𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐕𝐬. 𝐃𝐞𝐩𝐮𝐭𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐋𝐋 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟏 𝐒𝐂 𝟒𝟎𝟒 - The The apex court bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian discerned that the impugned externment order was an outcome of the complaints lodged by the journalist against government officials, some Madrasas and persons connected with such Madarasas who later lodged FIRs against the Appellant. The FIRs are clearly vindictive, retaliatory and aimed to teach a lesson to the Appellant and stifle his voice, the court said. The bench squashed the externment order observing that that a person cannot be denied his fundamental right to reside anywhere in the country or to move freely throughout the country, on flimsy grounds.that the drastic action of externment should only be taken in exceptional cases, to maintain law and order in a locality and/or prevent breach of publlic tranquility and peace. The court remarked that “it is patently clear that Sections 56 to 59 of the Act are intended to prevent lawlessness and deal with a class of lawless elements in society who cannot be brought to book by established methods of penal action, upon judicial trial. An externment order may sometimes be necessary for maintenance of law and order. However the drastic action of externment should only be taken in exceptional cases, to maintain law and order in a locality and/or prevent breach of public tranquility and peace." 𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐑𝐚𝐣𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐯𝐬. 𝐁𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐰𝐚𝐫 𝐋𝐚𝐥 𝐋𝐚𝐦𝐫𝐨𝐫 (𝐋𝐋 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟏 𝐒𝐂 𝟒𝟎𝟓)- The facts stated that on Administrative Committee’s recommendation, a judicial officer of Rajasthan HC was compulsorily retired, then a writ petition filed by the accused was allowed, and the compulsory retirement was removed. SC held that the HC had done the examination of the entire record of the judicial officer from scratch overlooking the Administrative Committee’s one, and added that HC cannot alter the reports for its satisfaction. The accused had pending disciplinary enquiry, was sub-par and short of the standard expected from judicial officers. Hence, the appeal was allowed. The Supreme Court observed that solitary remark regarding lack of integrity is sufficient to order compulsory retirement of a Judicial Officer. Connect with us - INSTAGRAM : @cclsr.kiit   / cclsr.kiit   FACEBOOK :   / kiit-centre-for-constitutional-law-studies...   TWITTER : @CclsrKiit   / cclsrkiit   LINKEDIN :   / centre-for-constitutional-law-studies-and-...